It is common practice in a networked computer environment for a computer user to collaborate on an electronic document with another user on the network. Such a network may be a Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area Network (WAN), the Internet or the like. In such a collaboration, each user may create and edit an electronic file by using a software application such as general application software, or software designed specifically for the type of file that is the object of the collaboration, or the like.
The collaboration may be made possible by maintaining a master version of the electronic file in a location that is accessible to all users who will be collaborating on the file. In a conventional networked computer environment, there may exist a server computer and one or more user computers. The server maintains communications links between, and is accessible to, each user computer and therefore may store and control the master version of the file being collaborated on by the users. When collaborating on an electronic file, a user may first access the master version of the file on the server, and then copy the file to the user's computer. The user may then work on the file by altering the file in any way made available to the user by the application. For example, if the application is a word processor, spreadsheet, database, and/or the like, the application may provide means for performing tasks such as editing, copying, deleting and/or the like. At the completion of any alterations, the user may save changes to the version of the file stored on the user's computer if the user wishes to retain such alterations to the file. In other systems, such as a system where no server computer exists, the master version may be stored on a user computer.
In order to collaborate with other users via the server, a user with a changed version stored on the user's computer must synchronize the version of the file on the computer with the master version of the file on the server. Synchronizing a plurality of versions of an electronic file, in its simplest form, ensures that all versions, once synchronized, are identical. In this way, the user performing the synchronization will enable other users who are participating in the collaboration to access the newly-altered file. Conventionally, a synchronization is performed by a synchronization utility. A synchronization utility is typically separate from the application, and in many cases is part of the operating system of the user computer. The conventional synchronization utility performs synchronizations at predetermined times, or as requested by the operating system.
In a conventional synchronization, a synchronization utility will compare the user version of the file to the master version of the file using whatever information about the copies the utility is able to comprehend. Typically, such information is limited to the date and/or time of the last update of each version. If the date and/or time is identical, the synchronization utility determines that both versions are identical, and therefore synchronized, and that no further action is required. If a discrepancy exists between the date and/or time, however, the synchronization utility provides the user associated with the computer that is driving the synchronization event with a user interface. The user interface conventionally provides a user with a brief notification that there is a discrepancy, the date and/or time of such last update for each version of the file, and a request for an instruction from the user as to which copy of the file the user wishes to keep. If the user elects to keep the user version, the synchronization utility overwrites the master version with the user version, thereby making the user version the new master version on the server. If the user desires to keep the master version, no further action is taken, or the user version is overwritten with the master version. In some user interfaces, a user is presented with an option to abort the synchronization, rather than choosing which version will be the master version.
The conventional synchronization as discussed above has significant disadvantages. Because a conventional synchronization utility has limited functionality with respect to an electronic file, a user interface generated by the conventional utility presents only a limited amount of information to a user when prompting a user to select a course of action. Such a limited amount of information may therefore cause such user to make an uninformed and possibly incorrect decision about which course of action to take. For example, a first user may alter a previously-synchronized user version of the file and then at some point the conventional synchronization utility initiates a synchronization event. When notified by the conventional user interface, the user may see that the user version was updated later than the master version and therefore decide to overwrite the master version. However, the information presented by the conventional user interface does not inform the user whether the master version has remained unchanged since the user began altering the user version. This leads to a problematic situation, where a second user may have made alterations to another user version, and then synchronized that user version with the master version before the first user's synchronization. The first user's version is more recent—having been updated later—but the master version has undergone alterations by the second user that were not present when the first user originally copied the file from the server. As a result, the second user's alterations to the master version are lost once the first user completes the synchronization.
The above situation is caused by a conventional synchronization utility's lack of the full range of functionality inherent in the application relevant to the file, so the utility is unable to use that functionality during a synchronization event. Therefore, the utility can only provide to a user a very limited amount of information regarding the different versions of the electronic file, such as, for example, the date and/or time of the last update to each version of the file as discussed above.
Another disadvantage caused by the limited functionality of conventional synchronization utilities is the lack of multiple courses of action available to a user during a synchronization. For example, in the example discussed above, the user interface only presents three options: update the master copy with the user copy, update the user copy with the master copy, or abort.
A further disadvantage of a conventional synchronization utility stems from a lack of integration of such utility with such application. For example, and as discussed above, a conventional synchronization utility is part of an operating system of a user or server computer. Therefore, the synchronization process, and any applicable user interface, is conventionally conducted outside of the application user experience. This may lead to confusion among users who—while such users may be proficient with the application—are not proficient with an operating system utility. Additionally, and as a result of the lack of integration, a synchronization may be initiated by the synchronization utility at a time that is not optimal for such event to take place. An additional disadvantage of conventional synchronization utilities is the inability of such a utility to be used as a component of a software application. For example, using conventional methods, a computer programmer is unable to create a first software application that uses a synchronization utility that as the ability to use a second application appropriate to the electronic file to reconcile multiple versions of the electronic file. Therefore, what is needed is an efficient means of using relevant software application functionality to resolve conflicts between copies of a file during a synchronization.